References
References
(OP)
I'm writing a paper in which the first couple of pages are basically a summary of some research reports (which I do mention toward the beginning and list among my references) mixed in with various tidbits learned from personal communication with the researchers and updates that I have participated in developing.
It goes a little something like this:
paragraph of history consisting of info available from various sources but I got a lot of it orally
paragraph saying that research was done & here's where to find the reports
page of summary of research
How do I handle appropriate citation? Is it enough to mention the reports at the beginning of the discussion of the research, and the reader can assume I got all of the following from the report? Do I need to find a specific reference for the history section?
If this were a magazine article I could just list the references and then proceed to write what I know, without fact-by-fact citations showing where I originally learned this information. But it's for conference proceedings.
Taking this on a hypothetical tangent, what does one do when writing about something one has known for so long that one does not remember the particular source? Can that just be considered fairly common knowledge and reported without a cited reference or does one need to dig up some kind of reference just to have one?
Hg
It goes a little something like this:
paragraph of history consisting of info available from various sources but I got a lot of it orally
paragraph saying that research was done & here's where to find the reports
page of summary of research
How do I handle appropriate citation? Is it enough to mention the reports at the beginning of the discussion of the research, and the reader can assume I got all of the following from the report? Do I need to find a specific reference for the history section?
If this were a magazine article I could just list the references and then proceed to write what I know, without fact-by-fact citations showing where I originally learned this information. But it's for conference proceedings.
Taking this on a hypothetical tangent, what does one do when writing about something one has known for so long that one does not remember the particular source? Can that just be considered fairly common knowledge and reported without a cited reference or does one need to dig up some kind of reference just to have one?
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376





RE: References
Also, the ASCE site has some recommendations on papers for conference procedings. some reference information is included under "Books".
http://www.pubs.asce.org/authors/conference.html
RE: References
RE: References
Typically when one gives some kind of fact or figure, one follows the sentence or the paragraph with the reference number that backs up the info.
What I have is a writeup of knowledge that lives in my head, but that can mostly be found in print. Most of what I've written can be found in the same reference. Do I need to put that same reference at the end of each paragraph? Do I need to go back and figure out which bits and pieces were not in that reference and find the other sources (many of the form "personal communication") and tag those sentences individually?
Or do I just talk about the research and the primary reference toward the beginning and figure that the reader can assume the whole intro section is based on that?
I'm not exactly worried about being accused of plagiarism. The paper's basically a "reporting" style, so there aren't any ideas or conclusions I'm claiming as my own, and I haven't directly paraphrased any written sources. I just want to do this properly.
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: References
I hate to be hard-assed about this, but the fact you can't remember where you first learned it doesn't excuse you from needing to cite a source. If you are likely to get asked "where did you get the value of 6.973 for the density of the flobbergast", then you should make the effort and dig up a reference for that value, or at least be ready to answer that you know this value from your own research efforts. Then again, if the source is dead or retired, and unlikely to care much in either case, you can use the "anecdotal source" citation as suggested by Mint. The test for "common knowledge" is if your secretary knows it.
RE: References
The history part that isn't in the research report I cite is more like "blah blah was developed in the 1940s"; I can find any number of sources to cite for that, but is that vague enough that I don't need to?
I'm wondering if maybe I can put the reference numbers for my main sources on the intro section heading itself and cover that whole section that way. If I include "personal communication" with the report author in that list of references, maybe that takes care of everything. Can I do that?
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: References
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: References
If it's trivial, then probably there is no need to cite a source.
As an aside, for "blah blah was developed in the 1940s" if it is patented or trademarked, look it up on the patent and trademark office web site and cite the patent number and date.
RE: References
I think I'm going to leave the intro section with an overall mention that the references exist and list them at the end (along with "personal communication"), and see what the reviewers say. Odds are the reviewers are less picky about this than I am--I dinged someone else for extensive paraphrasing of a reference with no direct cites the last time I was reviewing conference submittals.
Hypocritically,
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: References
RE: References
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read FAQ731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?
RE: References
If someone reading your a statement in your report is going to say, "Interesting, I wonder where to look that up," or if it is unique to a particular source then cite it immediately; otherwise, it will be too messy and distracting if every basic detail and equation were cited.
RE: References
I wound up putting it at the end of the section heading. It looks odd, but we'll see what the reviewers have to say about it.
But here's another question--I mention a government memorandum, and give its current URL in the text. Do I also need to put that memorandum in my reference list, and add a reference number in the text, even though the cite in the reference list doesn't say anything more than what I just got through saying in the text? I hate to clutter up my text for no additional information.
And why doesn't Word have a nonbreaking en dash? (Other than that there are only four of us on the planet who use en dashes, that is?)
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: References
RE: References
Just sent the paper off. We'll see.
Have a nice weekend, y'all.
Hg
Eng-Tips guidelines: FAQ731-376
RE: References
It sounds like you and I have similar high standards for referencing sources. I enjoy sharing credit with colleagues, others I've known seem more to enjoy sharing blame.